QUESTION A: Is the oath of the State's witness invalid in a criminal proceeding when that witness testifying from a foreign country by video-satellite transmission is sworn in by a notary of that foreign country, not by an official of a U.S. Court? Does that invalid oath make the witness' testifying in video invalid due to a lack of the S. ad Amendment Constitution Clause, i.e. the Oath, Promises a violation of defendant's rights as a Fourteenth Amendment Due Process of the FFL Amendment 2?

OF extraordinary importance such has ruling by the observer Court, does it open the door for other district courts to develop precedent interpretations of the United States Constitution 2

QUESTION B: Does failure to give a Mirandely warning during custodial interrogations make any statements concerning hard whereat addition satellite issable at the SF extraordinary importance 13, does this violate a defendant's right against self-incrimination and under Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution upon 2

QUESTION C: Does the presentation by prosecution of false testimony through a State witness during a criminal proceeding constitute a rights violation when the State knew the testimony was fake? af of Constitutional Law £ 990 and a violation of a defendant's Due Process right by affact under the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution?

Whether the oath of a State's witness is valid in a criminal proceeding when the witness is testifying from a foreign country by video-satellite transmission and is sworn in by a notary of that foreign country, not by an official of a U.S. court